Jayadvaita Can Not Understand — So He Changes It…

In a paper called “The Revision of Bhagavad-gita As It Is: Answers to a Courteous Inquiry” regarding Bhagavad-Gita 2.1, Jayadvaita Swami says: “Have you ever had to explain the last sentence of this purport? ‘This realization is made possible by working with the fruitive being situated in the fixed conception of the self.’ It’s just an editorial mistake, and it doesn’t make a damn bit of sense.”

In an Editorial Quiz by Jayadvaita Swami the question is posed:

“Please explain the meaning of ‘This realization is made possible by working with the fruitive being situated in the fixed conception of the self.’” (2.1, purport)

Jayadvaita Swami answers: “Forget it. The sentence is meaningless.”

I am just a Bhakta, I am not a big Swami, nor the head editor for the BBTI. I also never underwent any special education, training in editing or the use of, or manipulation, of the English language. But I love Srila Prabhupada and don’t question his authority. Some time ago someone brought up the fact that this sentence is very different in Srila Prabhupada’s Gita and Jayadvaita’s Gita and asked me how I felt about it. I read it with the devotee that asked me and it was clear to me what Srila Prabhupada says. Recently someone showed me the above public comments by Jayadvaita Swami about Srila Prabhupada’s books. So I will recap the conversation that I had with that devotee, if it is helpful to any one.

First of all, Srila Prabhupada says, “This realization”. If one simply reads the previous sentence in the purport it outlines what “This realization” is. Srila Prabhupada says very clearly “self-realization by an analytical study of the material body and the spirit soul”. Then Srila Prabhupada goes on to say that this realization “is made possible by working with the fruitive being”. Now this is also perfectly clear to me, the fruitive being is just that, a fruitive being/someone (a being) that is still on the furtive platform of existence, someone that is not yet a yogi or a sadhu. So this is the process. We all start where we are, as a fruitive being, that is the position of everyone in the beginning, and by working in Krishna consciousness we, the fruitive beings, can come gradually to higher understandings of the real self. So here Srila Prabhupada finishes the very clear sentence by giving the process by saying, “situated in the fixed conception of the self.” This is the process of Krishna consciousness – the conditioned soul, who is a fruitive being, must gradually become more and more, as Srila Prabhupada clearly says, ‘situated in the fixed conception of the real self’. This is the process and the end. This is Krishna consciousness. The process at the beginning and at the end are the same but one gradually progresses within this realization. It is all perfectly clear to me, I don’t know what the difficulty is in understanding this?

With all due respect to the BBTI’s staff, editorial practices, scholarship and realizations, if Jayadvaita Swami is saying that Srila Prabhupada’s Bhagavad-Gita is “meaningless” and he feels “doesn’t make a damn bit of sense” to him, and can’t understand such a simple point as this, then how is it he is freely editing Srila Prabhupada’s transcendentally perfect books?

This reminds me of a billboard I recently saw in front of a church that read, “We don’t change God’s words to fit us, we change ourselves to fit Gods words.”

Srila Prabhupada said in a Bhagavad-gita lecture on 10.4-5, in New York, January 4, 1967:

“You can speculate in any damn thing, and you can write volumes of books. That does not mean that you are a man of knowledge.”

If you would like some of Srila Prabhupada’s original, pure and authorized (pre-1978) books to bring with you in your daily life to distribute, please go to www.KrishnaStore.com

6 thoughts on “Jayadvaita Can Not Understand — So He Changes It…

  1. Hare Krsna,
    Lets no change a shastra as authentic as Prabhupada’s commentary on the Gita. Prabhupada himself confirmed that Lord Krsna dictated him so why change the an apaurusheya version.

  2. Hare Krishna.. Dandvat Parnam..
    Please dont make any change in shahtras (Srila Prabhupada Books)..
    As Prabhupada said I cant change in shashtras for the comfortablity of americans..PAMHo

  3. Fools such as this insult of a so called swami, Jayadvaita, are simply that, fools.

    We need pay no attention or respect to them,simply neglect them.

    They treat thier Guru like an senile old man thereby pulling the noose around thier throats, a little tighter.

    Death will come to this person in the name of Jayadvaita Swami, just as it comes for any other dog in the street.

    Will He still be arrogant facing the charges on that day?

    Well we have to remember, he’s a fool, so he might be…

  4. [Prabhupad, Sri Isopanisad mantra 13]:

    […] The pseudo religionists have neither knowledge nor detachment from material affairs, for most of them want to live in the golden shackles of material bondage under the shadow of philanthropic activities disguised as religious principles. By a false display of religious sentiments, they present a show of devotional service while indulging in all sorts of immoral activities. In this way they pass as spiritual masters and devotees of God. Such violators of religious principles have no respect for the authoritative ācāryas, the holy teachers in the strict disciplic succession. They ignore the Vedic injunction ācāryopāsana—”One must worship the ācārya”—and Kṛṣṇa’s statement in the Bhagavad-gītā (4.2) evaṁ paramparā-prāptam, “This supreme science of God is received through the disciplic succession.” Instead, to mislead the people in general they themselves become so-called ācāryas, but they do not even follow the principles of the ācāryas.

    These rogues are the most dangerous elements in human society. Because there is no religious government, they escape punishment by the law of the state. They cannot, however, escape the law of the Supreme, who has clearly declared in the Bhagavad-gītā that envious demons in the garb of religious propagandists shall be thrown into the darkest regions of hell (Bg. 16.19-20). Śrī Īśopaniṣad confirms that these pseudo religionists are heading toward the most obnoxious place in the universe after the completion of their spiritual master business, which they conduct simply for sense gratification.

  5. His Divine Grace A. C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada the founder acharya for the International Society for Krishna Consciousness did not leave ISKCON a directive indicating the following. That after leaving his body those in charge of the BBT should cease publishing former editions of his books once the BBT had completed specifically revised editions. Nor did he indicate in any manner that his original pre 1978 books not be read sold or used for study by anyone. Absence of that specific directive leaves all of the original publishing programes in place, an a fortiori. Revision of an original book by Srila Prabhupada does not set legal precedent to cancel the continued publication of the original editions at any time. There was and is no legal authority invested in the BBT to do this unless said by the author in legal documents hence actus reus. The BBT never prepared any preparatory statement to the public at large or to ISKCON at large about it’s plan to revise the original 1972 Gita and never requested input from the ISKCON society or any of Srila Prabhupadas disciples outside of ISKCON. Nor did the BBT inform the above that the original 1972 edition of the Gita would no longer be available. The BBT and ISKCON are decades over due regarding what they owe the public and Srila Prabhupadas disciples erga omnes. They have acted continually in bad faith regarding this issue and anyone outside of their tight inner circle.

    There must be an immediate international effort to take control of the BBT and all publishing of Srila Prabhupadas books while cancelling any further changes to Srila Prabhupadas books. The reprinting and distribution of all of his original pre 1978 books books should commence as soon as possible after the BBT is secured. If we do not move on this and remain silent then as individuals we must prepare to pay the individual consequences.

    Ys Hasti Gopala Dasa

  6. Dear Prahland Narasimha,
    I have worked in the BBT for 35 years and I can assure you that editorial mistakes do happen, on *each* stage of book production. When in 1981 I had to translate this sentence to German, it did not make sense to me either. I wrote a “Telex” to the American BBT and asked for a clarification. I specifically wanted to know if there are earlier stages of the manuscript. In his answer Ramesvara Swami kind of smashed me to pieces saying that we should just translate and not speculate. In any case, because that sentence in the printed book did not make any sense to me, we came up with a version very close to the present English BBT version. In the meantime I did get access to the manuscripts. The first five and a half chapters of the Gita were directly typed by Srila Prabhupada. This is what the manuscripts has: … and this realization is possible by working with fruitive result being situated on fixed up conclusion of the real self.

    There are two copies of that typed manuscript, actually. The first one is a kind of xerox copy of the typed manuscript, where the word “out” is inserted directly after “with”. I am not sure who wrote that but it could have been even Srila Prabhupada. Certainly he did write some changes in some other cases. The second copy is actually the original manuscript where the word “out” is displayed in the original blue color and some more corrections have been done with a black pen. This looks just like Hayagriva’s handwriting. In any case, according to SP teachings one should act without fruitive desire, so whoever added the “out” did a good job. If you think Srila Prabhupada could not have typed an error, I just ask why in the first place he engaged the BBT to correct his texts?

    In any case, the real problem came somewhere between this editing stage and the printing of the 1972 complete McMillan Gita. Someone who retyped the text must have (1) misread the “out” as “the” and (2) left out “result”. Thus we had, since then, “working with the fruitive being”. I wish to remind everyone that the text processing, at that early time, was, compared to today, real stone-age. Text had to be typed and retyped, and on each stage the typist could even add more mistakes while the idea was to improve the text.

    Many typists started their work after six hours of morning program, being half asleep. That is why it happened, now and then, that a whole line of text was skipped, especially when two lines of text start with the same word, if you know what I mean. The eye just slips. The idea that Srila Prabhupada checked all stages of the manuscript is simply a conspiracy theory that pushes all the errors done by sleepy typists indirectly into SP’s shoes. And because you realize that such a scenario is no good you simply say there were no mistakes. This you can only say because you have never worked on a book, probably. Now I have worked on more than a thousand books, both in the BBT and in the professional field, and I do know how easily errors can creep in.

    What you are saying is more or less in the same line like Ramesvara Swami’s telex. It stresses some kind of ideal authority structure which cannot allow for mistakes. The main reason why I am not in the BBT anymore is exactly because I cannot stand such a streamlined, artificial version of reality which does not match our world. I fully support Jayadvaita Swami’s notion regarding this correction.

    Govinda Madhava das

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *